Enlarge/ Boeing’s Starliner spacecraft is lifted to be placed atop an Atlas V rocket for its first crewed launch.
United Launch Alliance
NASA is planning to significantly delay the launch of the Crew 9 mission to the International Space Station due to ongoing concerns about the Starliner spacecraft currently attached to the station.
While the space agency has not said anything publicly, sources say NASA should announce the decision this week. Officials are contemplating moving the Crew-9 mission from its current date of August 18 to September 24, a significant slip.
Nominally, this Crew Dragon mission will carry NASA astronauts Zena Cardman, spacecraft commander; Nick Hague, pilot; and Stephanie Wilson, mission specialist; as well as Roscosmos cosmonaut Alexander Gorbunov, for a six-month journey to the space station. However, NASA has been considering alternatives to the crew lineup—possibly launching with two astronauts instead of four—due to ongoing discussions about the viability of Starliner to safely return astronauts Butch Wilmore and Suni Williams to Earth.
As of late last week, NASA still had not decided whether the Starliner vehicle, which is built and operated by Boeing, should be used to fly its two crew members home. During its launch and ascent to the space station two months ago, five small thrusters on the Starliner spacecraft failed. After extensive ground testing of the thrusters, as well as some brief in-space firings, NASA had planned to make a decision last week on whether to return Starliner with crew. However, a Flight Readiness Review planned for last Thursday was delayed after internal disagreements at NASA about the safety of Starliner.
At issue is the performance of the small reaction control system thrusters in proximity to the space station. If the right combination of them fail before Starliner has moved sufficiently far from the station, Starliner could become uncontrollable and collide with the space station. The thrusters are also needed later in the flight back to Earth to set up the critical de-orbit burn and entry in Earth’s atmosphere.
Software struggles
NASA has quietly been studying the possibility of crew returning in a Dragon for more than a month. As NASA and Boeing engineers have yet to identify a root cause of the thruster failure, the possibility of Wilmore and Williams returning on a Dragon spacecraft has increased in the last 10 days. NASA has consistently said that ‘crew safety’ will be its No. 1 priority in deciding how to proceed.
The Crew 9 delay is relevant to the Starliner dilemma for a couple of reasons. One, it gives NASA more time to determine the flight-worthiness of Starliner. However, there is also another surprising reason for the delay—the need to update Starliner’s flight software. Three separate, well-placed sources have confirmed to Ars that the current flight software on board Starliner cannot perform an automated undocking from the space station and entry into Earth’s atmosphere.
At first blush, this seems absurd. After all, Boeing’s Orbital Flight Test 2 mission in May 2022 was a fully automated test of the Starliner vehicle. During this mission, the spacecraft flew up to the space station without crew on board and then returned to Earth six days later. Although the 2022 flight test was completed by a different Starliner vehicle, it clearly demonstrated the ability of the program’s flight software to autonomously dock and return to Earth. Boeing did not respond to a media query about why this capability was removed for the crew flight test.
Welcome to Edition 7.05 of the Rocket Report! The Federal Aviation Administration grounded SpaceX’s Falcon 9 rocket for 15 days after a rare failure of its upper stage earlier this month. The FAA gave the green light for Falcon 9 to return to flight July 25, and within a couple of days, SpaceX successfully launched three missions from three launch pads. There’s a lot on Falcon 9’s to-do list, so we expect SpaceX to quickly return to form with several flights per week.
As always, we welcome reader submissions. If you don’t want to miss an issue, please subscribe using the box below (the form will not appear on AMP-enabled versions of the site). Each report will include information on small-, medium-, and heavy-lift rockets as well as a quick look ahead at the next three launches on the calendar.
Big delay for a reusable rocket testbed. The French space agency, CNES, has revealed that the inaugural test flight of its Callisto reusable rocket demonstrator will not take place until late 2025 or early 2026, European Spaceflight reports. CNES unveiled an updated website for the Callisto rocket program earlier this month, showing the test rocket has been delayed from a debut launch later this year to until late 2025 or early 2026. The Callisto rocket is designed to test techniques and technologies required for reusable rockets, such as vertical takeoff and vertical landing, with suborbital flights from the Guiana Space Center in South America.
Cooperative action … Callisto, which stands for Cooperative Action Leading to Launcher Innovation in Stage Toss-back Operations, is a joint project between CNES, German space agency DLR, and JAXA, the Japanese space agency. It will stand 14 meters (46 feet) tall and weigh about 4 metric tons (8,800 pounds), with an engine supplied by Japan. Callisto is one of several test projects in Europe aiming to pave the way for a future reusable rocket. (submitted by EllPeaTea and Ken the Bin)
The easiest way to keep up with Eric Berger’s space reporting is to sign up for his newsletter, we’ll collect his stories in your inbox.
Small step for Themis. Another European project established to demonstrate reusable rocket tech is making slow progress toward a first flight. The Themis project, funded by the European Space Agency, is similar in purpose to the Callisto testbed discussed above. This week, the German aerospace manufacturing company MT Aerospace announced it has begun testing a demonstrator of the landing legs that will be used aboard the Themis reusable booster, European Spaceflight reports. The landing legs for Themis are made of carbon fiber-reinforced plastic composites, and the initial test demonstrated good deployment and showed it would withstand the impact energy of landing.
Also delayed … Like Callisto, Themis is facing delays in getting to the launch pad. ArianeGroup, the ESA-selected Themis prime contractor, had been expected to conduct an initial hop test of the demonstrator before the end of 2024. However, officials have announced the initial hop tests won’t happen until sometime next year. The Themis booster is intended to eventually become the first stage booster for an orbital-class partially reusable rocket being developed by MaiaSpace, a subsidiary of ArianeGroup. (submitted by Ken the Bin)
Falcon 9 is flying again. A SpaceX Falcon 9 rocket returned to flight on July 27, barely two weeks after an upper stage failure ended a streak of more than 300 consecutive successful launches, Ars reports. By some measures this was an extremely routine mission—it was, after all, SpaceX’s 73rd launch of this calendar year. And like many other Falcon 9 launches this year, the “Starlink 10-9” mission carried 23 of the broadband Internet satellites into orbit. However, after a rare failure earlier this month, this particular Falcon 9 rocket was making a return-to-flight for the company and attempting to get the world’s most active booster back into service.
Best part is no part … The Falcon 9 successfully deployed its payload of Starlink satellites about an hour after lifting off from NASA’s Kennedy Space Center in Florida. Later in the weekend, SpaceX launched two more Starlink missions on Falcon 9 rockets from Florida and California, notching three flights in less than 28 hours. The launch failure on the previous Falcon 9 launch was caused by a liquid oxygen leak on the upper stage, which led to a “hard start” on the upper stage engine when it attempted to reignite in flight. Engineers and technicians were quickly able to pinpoint the cause of the leak, a crack in a “sense line” for a pressure sensor attached to the vehicle’s liquid oxygen system.
Atlas V’s NSSL era is over. United Launch Alliance delivered a classified US military payload to orbit Tuesday for the last time with an Atlas V rocket, ending the Pentagon’s use of Russian rocket engines as national security missions transition to all-American launchers, Ars reports. This was the 101st launch of an Atlas V rocket since its debut in 2002, and the 58th and final Atlas V mission with a US national security payload since 2007. The Atlas V is powered by an RD-180 main engine made in Russia, and with a little prodding from SpaceX (via a lawsuit) and Congress, the Pentagon started making moves to end its reliance on the RD-180 a decade ago.
Other options available … The RD-180 never failed on a National Security Space Launch (NSSL) mission using the Atlas V rocket, but its use became politically untenable after Russia’s annexation of Crimea in 2014, which predated Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine eight years later. SpaceX began launching US military missions in 2018, and ULA debuted its new Vulcan rocket in January. Assuming a successful second test flight of Vulcan in September, ULA’s next-generation rocket has a good shot at launching its first national security mission by the end of the year. The Space Force’s policy is to maintain at least two independent launch vehicles capable of flying military payloads into orbit. Vulcan and SpaceX’s Falcon rocket family fulfill that requirement, so the military no longer needs the Atlas V. However, 15 more Atlas V rockets remain in ULA’s inventory for future commercial flights.
Crackdown at the Cape. While this week’s landmark launch of the Atlas V rocket is worthy of celebration, there’s a new ULA policy that deserves ridicule, Ars reports. Many of the spectacular photos of rocket launches shared on social media come from independent photographers, who often make little to no money working for an established media organization. Instead, they rely on sales of prints to recoup at least some of their expenses for gas, food, and camera equipment needed to capture these images, which often serve as free publicity for launch providers like ULA. Last month, ULA announced it will no longer permit these photographers to set up remote cameras at their launch pads if they sell their images independently. This new policy was in place for the Atlas V launch from Cape Canaveral, Florida, on Tuesday morning.
But why? … “ULA will periodically confirm editorial publication for media participating in remote camera placement,” ULA stated in an email distributed to photographers last month. “If publication does not occur, or photos are sold outside of editorial purposes, privileges to place remote cameras may be revoked.” To the photographers who spend many hours preparing their equipment, waiting to set up and remove cameras, and persevering through scrubs and more, it seemed like a harsh judgment. And nobody knows why it happened. ULA has offered no public comment about the new policy, and the company did not respond to questions from Ars about the agreement.
Astroscale achieves a first in orbit. There are more than 2,000 mostly intact dead rockets circling the Earth, but until this year, no one ever launched a satellite to go see what one looked like after many years of tumbling around the planet, Ars reports. A Japanese company named Astroscale launched a small satellite in February to chase down the derelict upper stage from a Japanese H-IIA rocket. Astroscale’s ADRAS-J spacecraft arrived near the H-IIA upper stage in April, and the company announced this week that its satellite has now completed two 360-degree fly-arounds of the rocket. This is the first time a satellite has maneuvered around an actual piece of space junk, and it offers an unprecedented snapshot of how an abandoned rocket holds up to 15 years in the harsh environment of space.
Prepping for the future … Astroscale’s ADRAS-J mission is partially funded by the Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA). Astroscale and JAXA also have a contract for a follow-up mission named ADRAS-J2, which will attempt to link up with the same H-IIA rocket and steer it on a trajectory to burn up in Earth’s atmosphere. This would be the first demonstration of active debris removal, a concept pursued by Astroscale and other companies to help clear space junk out of low-Earth orbit.
An update on Ariane 6. The European Space Agency has released its first update on the results from the first flight of the Ariane 6 rocket since its launch July 9. Europe’s new flagship rocket had a mostly successful inaugural test flight. Its first stage, solid rocket boosters, and upper stage performed as expected for the first phase of the flight, delivering eight small satellites into an on-target orbit. The launch pad at the Guiana Space Center in South America also held up to the violent environment of launch, ESA said.
Still investigating … However, the final phase of the mission didn’t go according to plan. The upper stage’s Vinci engine was supposed to reignite for a third time on the test flight to deorbit the rocket, which would have released two small reentry capsules on technology demonstration missions to test heat shield technologies. This didn’t happen. An Auxiliary Propulsion Unit, which is a small engine to provide additional bursts of thrust and pressurize the upper stage’s propellant tanks, shut down shortly after startup ahead of the third burn of the primary Vinci engine. “This meant the Vinci engine’s third boost could not take place,” ESA said. “Analysis of the APU’s behavior is ongoing and further information will be made available as soon as possible, while the next task force update is expected in September.” (submitted by Ken the Bin)
Room to grow at Starbase. SpaceX has since launched Starship four times from its launch site in South Texas, known as Starbase, and is planning a fifth launch within the next two months, Ars reports. However, as it continues to test Starship and make plans for regular flights, SpaceX will need a higher flight rate. This is especially true as the company is unlikely to activate additional launch pads for Starship in Florida until at least 2026. To that end, SpaceX has asked the FAA for permission for up to 25 flights a year from South Texas, as well as the capability to land both the Starship upper stage and Super Heavy booster stage back at the launch site.
The answer is probably yes … On Monday, the FAA signaled that it is inclined to grant this request. The agency released a draft assessment indicating that its extensive 2022 analysis of Starship launch activities on the environment, wildlife, local communities, and more was sufficient to account for SpaceX’s proposal for more launches. There is more to do for this conclusion to become official, including public meetings and a public comment period this month.
SpaceX eyes Australia. SpaceX is in talks with US and Australian officials to land and recover one of its Starship rockets off Australia’s coast, a possible first step toward a bigger presence for Elon Musk’s company in the region as the two countries bolster security ties, Reuters reports. At the end of SpaceX’s fourth Starship test flight in June, the rocket made a controlled splashdown in the Indian Ocean hundreds of miles off the northwest coast of Australia. The discussions now underway are focused on the possibility of towing a future Starship vehicle from its splashdown point in the ocean to a port in Australia, where SpaceX engineers could inspect it and learn more about how it performed.
Eventually, it’ll come back to land … On the next Starship flight, currently planned for no earlier than late August, SpaceX plans to attempt to recover Starship’s giant Super Heavy booster using catch arms on the launch pad tower in Texas. On Sunday, Elon Musk told SpaceX and Tesla enthusiasts at an event called the “X Takeover” that it will take a few more flights for engineers to get comfortable returning the Starship itself to a landing onshore. “We want to be really confident that the ship heat shield is super robust and lands at the exact right location,” he said. “So before we try to bring the ship back to the launch site, we probably want to have at least three successful landings of the ship [at sea].” (submitted by Ken the Bin)
Next three launches
August 2: Electron | “Owl for One, One for Owl” | Mahia Peninsula, New Zealand | 16: 39 UTC
August 3: Falcon 9 | NG-21 | Cape Canaveral Space Force Station, Florida | 15: 28 UTC
August 4: Falcon 9 | Starlink 11-1 | Vandenberg Space Force Base, California | 07: 00 UTC
Enlarge/ Boeing’s Starliner spacecraft is seen docked at the International Space Station on June 13.
It has now been eight weeks since Boeing’s Starliner spacecraft launched into orbit on an Atlas V rocket, bound for the International Space Station. At the time NASA officials said the two crew members, Butch Wilmore and Suni Williams, could return to Earth as soon as June 14, just eight days later.
Yes, there had been some problems on Starliner’s ride to the space station that involved helium leaks and failing thrusters. But officials said they were relatively minor and sought to downplay them. “Those are pretty small, really, issues to deal with,” Mark Nappi, vice president and manager of Boeing’s Commercial Crew Program, said during a post-docking news conference. “We’ll figure them out for the next mission. I don’t see these as significant at all.”
But days turned to weeks, and weeks turned to months as NASA and Boeing continued to study the two technical problems. Of these issues, the more pressing concern was the failure of multiple reaction control system thrusters that are essential to steering Starliner during its departure from the space station and setting up a critical engine burn to enter Earth’s atmosphere.
In the last few weeks, ground teams from NASA and Boeing completed testing of a thruster on a test stand at White Sands, New Mexico. Then, last weekend, Boeing and NASA fired the spacecraft’s thrusters in orbit to check their performance while docked at the space station. NASA has said preliminary results from these tests were helpful.
Dragon becomes a real option
One week ago, the last time NASA officials spoke to the media, the agency’s program manager for commercial crew, Steve Stich, would not be drawn into discussing what would happen should NASA conclude that Starliner’s thrusters were not reliable enough for the return journey to Earth.
“Our prime option is to complete the mission,” Stich said one week ago. “There are a lot of good reasons to complete this mission and bring Butch and Suni home on Starliner. Starliner was designed, as a spacecraft, to have the crew in the cockpit.”
For a long time, it seemed almost certain that the astronauts would return to Earth inside Starliner. However, there has been a lot of recent activity at NASA, Boeing, and SpaceX that suggests that Wilmore and Williams could come home aboard a Crew Dragon spacecraft rather than Starliner. Due to the critical importance of this mission, Ars is sharing what we know as of Thursday afternoon.
One informed source said it was greater than a 50-50 chance that the crew would come back on Dragon. Another source said it was significantly more likely than not they would. To be clear, NASA has not made a final decision. This probably will not happen until at least next week. It is likely that Jim Free, NASA’s associate administrator, will make the call.
Asked if it was now more likely than not that Starliner’s crew would return on Dragon, NASA spokesperson Josh Finch told Ars on Thursday evening, ” NASA is evaluating all options for the return of agency astronauts Butch Wilmore and Suni Williams from the International Space Station as safely as possible. No decisions have been made and the agency will continue to provide updates on its planning.”
Enlarge/ A rendering of NASA’s proposed lunar gateway.
NASA
Do you remember the Lunar Gateway? You could be forgiven if not, as the program continues to be tossed around by NASA planners, and it is still not entirely clear what purpose the lunar space station is supposed to serve.
The Gateway—a small space station that will fly in a halo orbit around the Moon and spend most of its time far from the lunar surface—was initially supposed to launch in 2022. That obviously did not happen, and now, according to a new report from the US Government Accountability Office, the space agency does not expect the launch of the initial elements of the Gateway until at least December 2027. The baseline cost estimate is $5.3 billion.
NASA’s present plans contemplate using the Gateway as part of the Artemis IV mission, presently scheduled for September 2028. Unfortunately, the Gateway’s current launch target is already three months later than needed to support Artemis IV, the second mission to land humans on the Moon. But that’s OK. There are a lot of other moving parts for this mission, so a launch any time this decade would be a win.
The report includes a helpful cartoon to explain the complicated sequence that needs to happen for Gateway to be involved in the Artemis IV mission:
Launch of the initial segments of the Gateway, a power and propulsion module, and a habitation module, to a halo orbit around the Moon
Launch of a SpaceX Dragon XL vehicle to bring supplies to the Gateway
Launch of multiple SpaceX Starships to fuel a Lunar Starship, which will then fly to and dock with the Gateway
Launch of a NASA Space Launch System rocket carrying four astronauts inside an Orion spacecraft as well as another Gateway module
After launch, Orion separates from the rocket and docks with this module, the International Habitat
Orion tugs the International Habitat to the Gateway and docks; the crew exits onto Gateway
Two crew members board the Lunar Starship and go down to the Moon for six days
Starship flies back to the Gateway, and the four astronauts return to Earth inside Orion.
How the Artemis IV mission will (probably) take place.
US GAO
In a rather understated manner, the report notes that this plan is fairly complex and faces some serious schedule risks.
“This mission will be complex because NASA will need to coordinate across seven NASA programs, multiple contractors that support those programs, and international partners to execute the mission,” the report states. “It will also be the first launch of an upgraded version of the Space Launch System rocket.”
Developmental difficulties
The report also finds that the Gateway program is running into some pretty serious technical difficulties. One involves a defective network chip that facilitates communication throughout the lunar space station. Its failure could cause myriad problems onboard the Gateway.
“For example, these defects could lead the flight computers to unexpectedly restart,” the report states. “If the network is not functioning properly, it could result in loss of control of the Gateway. Program officials are also concerned that they might identify more defects with the communication network, based on the number found already.”
Another risk involves something called “stack controllability.” This essentially means that because SpaceX’s Lunar Starship is so much more massive than the Gateway, when it is docked to the space station, the Gateway’s power and propulsion element (PPE) will not be able to maintain a proper orientation of the entire stack.
“Program officials estimate that the mass of the lunar lander Starship is approximately 18 times greater than the value NASA used to develop the PPE’s controllability parameters,” the report states. “According to NASA’s system engineering guidance, late requirements and design changes can lead to cost growth and schedule delays.”
The report also has some sobering conclusions about the potential utility of the Lunar Gateway for Mars missions. (In the past, NASA officials have spoken about the Gateway as a staging area for spacecraft and propellant for human missions to the surface of Mars.) However, the “stack controllability” issue poses a serious constraint to hosting large Mars transit vehicles. Moreover, the planned 15-year lifetime of the Gateway may not be long enough to sustain Mars missions.
“The Gateway could have exceeded its planned 15-year on-orbit life as early as 2042 when crewed missions to Mars are potentially just beginning,” the report states.
All in all, the report seems to suggest that the Gateway is way behind schedule and is of limited use to lunar and Mars landings. The report suggests the Gateway will be complex to undertake at the very same time NASA is attempting to establish a lunar surface program. But other than that, everything is going great.
Enlarge/ A Starliner spacecraft departs Boeing’s spacecraft processing facility before the program’s first orbital test flight in 2019.
Boeing announced another financial charge Wednesday for its troubled Starliner commercial crew program, bringing the company’s total losses on Starliner to $1.6 billion.
In its quarterly earnings report, Boeing registered a $125 million loss on the Starliner program, blaming delays on the spacecraft’s still-ongoing Crew Flight Test, the program’s first mission to carry astronauts into orbit. This is not the first time Boeing has reported a financial loss on Starliner. Including the new charge announced Wednesday, Boeing has now suffered an overall loss on the program of nearly $1.6 billion since 2016.
These losses have generally been caused by schedule delays and additional work to solve problems on Starliner. When NASA awarded Boeing a $4.2 billion contract to complete development of the Starliner spacecraft a decade ago, the aerospace contractor projected the capsule would be ready to fly astronauts by the end of 2017.
It turns out the Crew Flight Test didn’t launch until June 5, 2024.
In a separate announcement Wednesday, Boeing named Kelly Ortberg as the company’s CEO, effective August 8. He will replace Dave Calhoun, whose tenure as Boeing’s chief executive was marred by scandals with the 737 MAX passenger airplane. Ortberg was previously CEO of Rockwell Collins, now known as Collins Aerospace, a major supplier of avionics and other parts for the aerospace industry.
Boeing is on the hook
When NASA selected Boeing and SpaceX to develop the Starliner and Crew Dragon spacecraft for astronaut missions, the agency signed fixed-price agreements with each contractor. These fixed-price contracts mean the contractors, not the government, are responsible for paying for cost overruns.
So, with each Starliner delay since 2016, Boeing’s financial statements registered new losses. It will be Boeing’s burden to pay for solutions to problems discovered on Starliner’s ongoing crew test flight. That’s why Boeing warned investors Wednesday that it could lose more money on the Starliner program in the coming months and years.
“Risk remains that we may record additional losses in future periods,” Boeing wrote in an SEC filing.
Taking into account the financial loss revealed Wednesday, NASA and Boeing have committed at least $6.7 billion to the Starliner program since 2010, including expenses for spacecraft development, testing, and the government’s payment for six operational crew flights with Starliner.
It’s instructive to compare these costs with those of SpaceX’s Crew Dragon program, which started flying astronauts in 2020. All of NASA’s contracts with SpaceX for a similar scope of work on the Crew Dragon program totaled more than $3.1 billion, but any expenses paid by SpaceX are unknown because it is a privately held company.
SpaceX has completed all six of its original crew flights for NASA, while Boeing is at least a year away from starting operational service with Starliner. In light of Boeing’s delays, NASA extended SpaceX’s commercial crew contract to cover eight additional round-trip flights to the space station through the end of the 2020s.
Boeing’s leaders blame the structure of fixed-price contracts for the losses on the Starliner program. The aerospace giant has similar fixed-price contracts with the Pentagon to develop new two new Air Force One presidential transport aircraft, Air Force refueling tankers, refueling drones, and trainer airplanes. Boeing has reported losses on those programs, too.
SpaceX, meanwhile, has excelled with fixed-price contracts, which NASA uses on several elements of the Artemis program aiming to land astronauts on the Moon. For example, NASA selected SpaceX and Blue Origin, Jeff Bezos’s space company, for fixed-price contracts to develop human-rated lunar landers. SpaceX also won a fixed-price contract to provide NASA with a vehicle to deorbit the International Space Station at the end of its life.
Decision time
The first crew mission aboard Boeing’s Starliner spacecraft is expected to end sometime in August with the return of NASA astronauts Butch Wilmore and Suni Williams from the International Space Station. A successful conclusion of the test flight would pave the way for Boeing to start launching its backlog of six operational crew missions to the space station.
But it hasn’t been that simple. The Starliner test flight was initially expected to stay at the space station for at least eight days. Before the launch in June, NASA and Boeing officials left open the possibility for a mission extension, but managers didn’t anticipate Starliner to still be docked at the space station more than 50 days later.
Mission managers ordered Starliner to stay at the station through the rest of June and July while engineers investigated problems in the spacecraft’s propulsion system. There are helium leaks in Starliner’s service module, and the craft’s small maneuvering thrusters overheated during the final approach for docking at the space station.
NASA, which oversees Boeing’s commercial crew contract, is getting close to clearing Starliner for return to Earth, perhaps as soon as next week. On Saturday, ground controllers commanded Starliner to test-fire its maneuvering thrusters, and 27 of the 28 jets appeared to function normally despite overheating earlier in the mission. Despite the leaks, the spacecraft also has ample helium to pressurize its propulsion system, NASA officials said.
Before giving final approval for Starliner to undock from the space station and return to Earth, senior NASA leaders will convene a readiness review to go over the results of the investigation into the propulsion issues.
Boeing has some work to do to find a long-term fix for the helium leaks and overheating thrusters on future Starliner missions. NASA officials hoped a flawless Starliner test flight would allow the agency to formally certify the capsule for regular six-month expeditions to the space station by the end of the year, allowing Boeing to launch the first operational Starliner flight, known as Starliner-1, in February 2025.
Last week, NASA announced a six-month delay for the Starliner-1 mission to allow more time to solve the problems the spacecraft experienced on the crew test flight.
Enlarge/ A Crew Dragon spacecraft is seen docked at the International Space Station in 2022. The section of the spacecraft on the left is the pressurized capsule, while the rear section, at right, is the trunk.
NASA
Sometime next year, SpaceX will begin returning its Dragon crew and cargo capsules to splashdowns in the Pacific Ocean and end recoveries of the spacecraft off the coast of Florida.
This will allow SpaceX to make changes to the way it brings Dragons back to Earth and eliminate the risk, however tiny, that a piece of debris from the ship’s trunk section might fall on someone and cause damage, injury, or death.
“After five years of splashing down off the coast of Florida, we’ve decided to shift Dragon recovery operations back to the West Coast,” said Sarah Walker, SpaceX’s director of Dragon mission management.
Public safety
In the past couple of years, landowners have discovered debris from several Dragon missions on their property, and the fragments all came from the spacecraft’s trunk, an unpressurized section mounted behind the capsule as it carries astronauts or cargo on flights to and from the International Space Station.
SpaceX returned its first 21 Dragon cargo missions to splashdowns in the Pacific Ocean southwest of Los Angeles. When an upgraded human-rated version of Dragon started flying in 2019, SpaceX moved splashdowns to the Atlantic Ocean and the Gulf of Mexico to be closer to the company’s refurbishment and launch facilities at Cape Canaveral, Florida. The benefits of landing near Florida included a faster handover of astronauts and time-sensitive cargo back to NASA and shorter turnaround times between missions.
The old version of Dragon, known as Dragon 1, separated its trunk after the deorbit burn, allowing the trunk to fall into the Pacific. With the new version of Dragon, called Dragon 2, SpaceX changed the reentry profile to jettison the trunk before the deorbit burn. This meant that the trunk remained in orbit after each Dragon mission, while the capsule reentered the atmosphere on a guided trajectory. The trunk, which is made of composite materials and lacks a propulsion system, usually takes a few weeks or a few months to fall back into the atmosphere and doesn’t have control of where or when it reenters.
Air resistance from the rarefied upper atmosphere gradually slows the trunk’s velocity enough to drop it out of orbit, and the amount of aerodynamic drag the trunk sees is largely determined by fluctuations in solar activity.
SpaceX and NASA, which funded a large portion of the Dragon spacecraft’s development, initially determined the trunk would entirely burn up when it reentered the atmosphere and would pose no threat of surviving reentry and causing injuries or damaging property. However, that turned out to not be the case.
In May, a 90-pound chunk of a SpaceX Dragon spacecraft that departed the International Space Station fell on the property of a “glamping” resort in North Carolina. At the same time, a homeowner in a nearby town found a smaller piece of material that also appeared to be from the same Dragon mission.
These events followed the discovery in April of another nearly 90-pound piece of debris from a Dragon capsule on a farm in the Canadian province of Saskatchewan. SpaceX and NASA later determined the debris fell from orbit in February, and earlier this month, SpaceX employees came to the farm to retrieve the wreckage, according to CBC.
Pieces of a Dragon spacecraft also fell over Colorado last year, and a farmer in Australia found debris from a Dragon capsule on his land in 2022.
The central piece of NASA’s second Space Launch System rocket arrived at Kennedy Space Center in Florida this week. Agency officials intend to start stacking the towering launcher in the next couple of months for a mission late next year carrying a team of four astronauts around the Moon.
The Artemis II mission, officially scheduled for September 2025, will be the first voyage by humans to the vicinity of the Moon since the last Apollo lunar landing mission in 1972. NASA astronauts Reid Wiseman, Victor Glover, Christina Koch, and Canadian mission specialist Jeremy Hansen will ride the SLS rocket away from Earth, then fly around the far side of the Moon and return home inside NASA’s Orion spacecraft.
“The core is the backbone of SLS, and it’s the backbone of the Artemis mission,” said Matthew Ramsey, NASA’s mission manager for Artemis II. “We’ve been waiting for the core to get here because all the integrated tests and checkouts that we do have to have the core stage. It has the flight avionics that drive the whole system. The boosters are also important, but the core is really the backbone for Artemis. So it’s a big day.”
The core stage rolled off of NASA’s Pegasus barge at Kennedy early Wednesday, following a weeklong ocean voyage from New Orleans, where Boeing builds the rocket under contract to NASA.
Ramsey told Ars that ground teams hope to begin stacking the rocket’s two powerful solid rocket boosters on NASA’s mobile launcher platform in September. Each booster, supplied by Northrop Grumman, is made of five segments with pre-packed solid propellant and a nose cone. All the pieces for the SLS boosters are at Kennedy and ready for stacking, Ramsey said.
The SLS upper stage, built by United Launch Alliance, is also at the Florida launch site. Now, the core stage is at Kennedy. In August or September, NASA plans to deliver the two remaining elements of the SLS rocket to Florida. These are the adapter structures that will connect the core stage to the upper stage, and the upper stage to the Orion spacecraft.
A heavy-duty crane inside the cavernous Vehicle Assembly Building (VAB) will hoist each segment of the SLS boosters into place on the launch platform. Once the boosters are fully stacked, ground teams will lift the 212-foot (65-meter) core stage vertical in the transfer aisle running through the center of the VAB. A crane will then lower the core stage between the boosters. That could happen as soon as December, according to Ramsey.
Then comes the launch vehicle stage adapter, the upper stage, the Orion stage adapter, and finally, the Orion spacecraft itself.
Moving toward operations
NASA’s inspector general reported in 2022 that NASA’s first four Artemis missions will each cost $4.1 billion. Subsequent documents, including a Government Accountability Office report last year, suggest the expendable SLS core stage is responsible for at least a quarter of the cost for each Artemis flight.
The core stage for Artemis II is powered by four hydrogen-fueled RS-25 engines produced by Aerojet Rocketdyne. Two of the reusable engines for Artemis II have flown on the space shuttle, and the other two RS-25s were built in the shuttle era but never flew. Each SLS launch will put the core stage and its engines in the Atlantic Ocean.
Steve Wofford, who manages the stages office for the SLS program at NASA’s Marshall Space Flight Center, told Ars there are “no major configuration differences” between the core stages for Artemis I and Artemis II. The only minor differences involve instrumentation that NASA wanted on Artemis I to measure pressures, accelerations, vibrations, temperatures, and other parameters on the first flight of the Space Launch System.
“We are still working off some flight observations that we made on Artemis I, but no showstoppers,” Wofford said. “On the first article, the test flight, Artemis I, we really loaded it up. That’s a golden opportunity to learn as much as you can about the vehicle and the flight regime, and anchor all your models… As you progress, you need less and less of that. So Core Stage 2 will have less development flight instrumentation than Core Stage 1, and then Core Stage 3 will have less still.”
Enlarge/ Boeing’s Strainer spacecraft is seen docked at the International Space Station in this picture taken July 3.
The astronauts who rode Boeing’s Starliner spacecraft to the International Space Station last month still don’t know when they will return to Earth.
Astronauts Butch Wilmore and Suni Williams have been in space for 51 days, six weeks longer than originally planned, as engineers on the groundwork through problems with Starliner’s propulsion system.
The problems are twofold. The spacecraft’s reaction control thrusters overheated, and some of them shut off as Starliner approached the space station June 6. A separate, although perhaps related, problem involves helium leaks in the craft’s propulsion system.
On Thursday, NASA and Boeing managers said they still plan to bring Wilmore and Williams home on the Starliner spacecraft. In the last few weeks, ground teams completed testing of a thruster on a test stand at White Sands, New Mexico. This weekend, Boeing and NASA plan to fire the spacecraft’s thrusters in orbit to check their performance while docked at the space station.
“I think we’re starting to close in on those final pieces of flight rationale to make sure that we can come home safely, and that’s our primary focus right now,” Stich said.
The problems have led to speculation that NASA might decide to return Wilmore and Williams to Earth in a SpaceX Crew Dragon spacecraft. There’s one Crew Dragon currently docked at the station, and another one is slated to launch with a fresh crew next month. Steve Stich, manager of NASA’s commercial crew program, said the agency has looked at backup plans to bring the Starliner crew home on a SpaceX capsule, but the main focus is still to have the astronauts fly home aboard Starliner.
“Our prime option is to complete the mission,” Stich said. “There are a lot of good reasons to complete this mission and bring Butch and Suni home on Starliner. Starliner was designed, as a spacecraft, to have the crew in the cockpit.”
Starliner launched from Cape Canaveral Space Force Station in Florida on June 5. Wilmore and Williams are the first astronauts to fly into space on Boeing’s commercial crew capsule, and this test flight is intended to pave the way for future operational flights to rotate crews of four to and from the International Space Station.
Once NASA fully certifies Starliner for operational missions, the agency will have two human-rated spaceships for flights to the station. SpaceX’s Crew Dragon has been flying astronauts since 2020.
Tests, tests, and more tests
NASA has extended the duration of the Starliner test flight to conduct tests and analyze data in an effort to gain confidence in the spacecraft’s ability to safely bring its crew home and to better understand the root causes of the overheating thrusters and helium leaks. These problems are inside Starliner’s service module, which is jettisoned to burn up in the atmosphere during reentry, while the reusable crew module, with the astronauts inside, parachutes to an airbag-cushioned landing.
The most important of these tests was a series of test-firings of a Starliner thruster on the ground. This thruster was taken from a set of hardware slated to fly on a future Starlink mission, and engineers put it through a stress test, firing it numerous times to replicate the sequence of pulses it would see in flight. The testing simulated two sequences of flying up to the space station, and five sequences the thruster would execute during undocking and a deorbit burn for return to Earth.
“This thruster has seen quite a bit of pulses, maybe even more than what we would anticipate we would see during a flight, and more aggressive in terms of two uphills and five downhills,” Stich said. “What we did see in the thruster is the same kind of thrust degradation that we’re seeing on orbit. In a number of the thrusters (on Starliner), we’re seeing reduced thrust, which is important.”
Starliner’s flight computer shut off five of the spacecraft’s 28 reaction control system thrusters, produced by Aerojet Rocketdyne, during the rendezvous with the space station last month. Four of the five thrusters were recovered after overheating and losing thrust, but officials have declared one of the thrusters unusable.
The thruster tested on the ground showed similar behavior. Inspections of the thruster at White Sands showed bulging in a Teflon seal in an oxidizer valve, which could restrict the flow of nitrogen tetroxide propellant. The thrusters, each generating about 85 pounds of thrust, consume the nitrogen tetroxide, or NTO, oxidizer and mix it with hydrazine fuel for combustion.
A poppet valve, similar to an inflation valve on a tire, is designed to open and close to allow nitrogen tetroxide to flow into the thruster.
“That poppet has a Teflon seal at the end of it,” Nappi said. “Through the heating and natural vacuum that occurs with the thruster firing, that poppet seal was deformed and actually bulged out a little bit.”
Stich said engineers are evaluating the integrity of the Teflon seal to determine if it could remain intact through the undocking and deorbit burn of the Starliner spacecraft. The thrusters aren’t needed while Starliner is attached to the space station.
“Could that particular seal survive the rest of the flight? That’s the important part,” Stich said.
Enlarge/ With Dragon and Falcon, SpaceX has become an essential contractor for NASA.
SpaceX
There is an emerging truth about NASA’s push toward commercial contracts that is increasingly difficult to escape: Companies not named SpaceX are struggling with NASA’s approach of awarding firm, fixed-price contracts for space services.
This belief is underscored by the recent award of an $843 million contract to SpaceX for a heavily modified Dragon spacecraft that will be used to deorbit the International Space Station by 2030.
The recently released source selection statement for the “US Deorbit Vehicle” contract, a process led by NASA head of space operations Ken Bowersox, reveals that the competition was a total stomp. SpaceX faced just a single serious competitor in this process, Northrop Grumman. And in all three categories—price, mission suitability, and past performance—SpaceX significantly outclassed Northrop.
Although it’s wonderful that NASA has an excellent contractor in SpaceX, it’s not healthy in the long term that there are so few credible competitors. Moreover, a careful reading of the source selection statement reveals that NASA had to really work to get a competition at all.
“I was really happy that we got proposals from the companies that we did,” Bowersox said during a media teleconference last week. “The companies that sent us proposals are both great companies, and it was awesome to see that interest. I would have expected a few more [proposals], honestly, but I was very happy to get the ones that we got.”
Commercial initiatives struggling
NASA’s push into “commercial” space began nearly two decades ago with a program to deliver cargo to the International Space Station. The space agency initially selected SpaceX and Rocketplane Kistler to develop rockets and spacecraft to accomplish this, but after Kistler missed milestones, the company was subsequently replaced by Orbital Sciences Corporation. The cargo delivery program was largely successful, resulting in the Cargo Dragon (SpaceX) and Cygnus (Orbital Sciences) spacecraft. It continues to this day.
A commercial approach generally means that NASA pays a “fixed” price for a service rather than paying a contractor’s costs plus a fee. It also means that NASA hopes to become one of many customers. The idea is that, as the first mover, NASA is helping to stimulate a market by which its fixed-priced contractors can also sell their services to other entities—both private companies and other space agencies.
NASA has since extended this commercial approach to crew, with SpaceX and Boeing winning large contracts in 2014. However, only SpaceX has flown operational astronaut missions, while Boeing remains in the development and test phase, with its ongoing Crew Flight Test. Whereas SpaceX has sold half a dozen private crewed missions on Dragon, Boeing has yet to announce any.
Such a commercial approach has also been tried with lunar cargo delivery through the “Commercial Lunar Payload Services” program, as well as larger lunar landers (Human Landing System), next-generation spacesuits, and commercial space stations. Each of these programs has a mixed record at best. For example, NASA’s inspector general was highly critical of the lunar cargo program in a recent report, and one of the two spacesuit contractors, Collins Aerospace, recently dropped out because it could not execute on its fixed-price contract.
Some of NASA’s most important traditional space contractors, including Lockheed Martin, Boeing, and Northrop Grumman, have all said they are reconsidering whether to participate in fixed-price contract competitions in the future. For example, Northrop CEO Kathy Warden said last August, “We are being even more disciplined moving forward in ensuring that we work with the government to have the appropriate use of fixed-price contracts.”
So the large traditional space contractors don’t like fixed-price contracts, and many new space companies are struggling to survive in this environment.
Enlarge/ This artist’s concept shows the possible appearance of ESA’s RAMSES spacecraft, which will release two small CubeSats for additional observations at Apophis.
For nearly 20 years, scientists have known an asteroid named Apophis will pass unusually close to Earth on Friday, April 13, 2029. But most officials at the world’s space agencies stopped paying much attention when updated measurements ruled out the chance Apophis will impact Earth anytime soon.
Now, Apophis is again on the agenda, but this time as a science opportunity, not as a threat. The problem is there’s not much time to design, build and launch a spacecraft to get into position near Apophis in less than five years. The good news is there are designs, and in some cases, existing spacecraft, that governments can repurpose for missions to Apophis, a rocky asteroid about the size of three football fields.
Scientists discovered Apophis in 2004, and the first measurements of its orbit indicated there was a small chance it could strike Earth in 2029 or in 2036. Using more detailed radar observations of Apophis, scientists in 2021 ruled out any danger to Earth for at least the next 100 years.
“The three most important things about Apophis are: It will miss the Earth. It will miss the Earth. It will miss the Earth,” said Richard Binzel, a professor of planetary science at MIT. Binzel has co-chaired several conferences since 2020 aimed at drumming up support for space missions to take advantage of the Apophis opportunity in 2029.
“An asteroid this large comes this close only once per 1,000 years, or less frequently,” Binzel told Ars. “This is an experiment that nature is doing for us, bringing a large asteroid this close, such that Earth’s gravitational forces and tidal forces are going to tug and possibly shake this asteroid. The asteroid’s response is insightful to its interior.”
It’s important, Binzel argues, to get a glimpse of Apophis before and after its closest approach in 2029, when it will pass less than 20,000 miles (32,000 kilometers) from Earth’s surface, closer than the orbits of geostationary satellites.
“This is a natural experiment that will reveal how hazardous asteroids are put together, and there is no other way to get this information without vastly complicated spacecraft experiments,” Binzel said. “So this is a once-per-many-thousands-of-years experiment that nature is doing for us. We have to figure out how to watch.”
This week, the European Space Agency announced preliminary approval for a mission named RAMSES, which would launch in April 2028, a year ahead of the Apophis flyby, to rendezvous with the asteroid in early 2029. If ESA member states grant full approval for development next year, the RAMSES spacecraft will accompany Apophis throughout its flyby with Earth, collecting imagery and other scientific measurements before, during, and after closest approach.
The challenge of building and launching RAMSES in less than four years will serve as good practice for a potential future real-world scenario. If astronomers find an asteroid that’s really on a collision course with Earth, it might be necessary to respond quickly. Given enough time, space agencies could mount a reconnaissance mission, and if necessary, a mission to deflect or redirect the asteroid, likely using a technique similar to the one demonstrated by NASA’s DART mission in 2022.
“RAMSES will demonstrate that humankind can deploy a reconnaissance mission to rendezvous with an incoming asteroid in just a few years,” said Richard Moissl, head of ESA’s planetary defense office. “This type of mission is a cornerstone of humankind’s response to a hazardous asteroid. A reconnaissance mission would be launched first to analyze the incoming asteroid’s orbit and structure. The results would be used to determine how best to redirect the asteroid or to rule out non-impacts before an expensive deflector mission is developed.”
Shaking off the cobwebs
In order to make a 2028 launch feasible for RAMSES, ESA will reuse the design of a roughly half-ton spacecraft named Hera, which is scheduled for launch in October on a mission to survey the binary asteroid system targeted by the DART impact experiment in 2022. Copying the design of Hera will reduce the time needed to get RAMSES to the launch pad, ESA officials said.
“Hera demonstrated how ESA and European industry can meet strict deadlines and RAMSES will follow its example,” said Paolo Martino, who leads ESA’s development of Ramses, which stands for the Rapid Apophis Mission for Space Safety.
ESA’s space safety board recently authorized preparatory work on the RAMSES mission using funds already in the agency’s budget. OHB, the German spacecraft manufacturer that is building Hera, will also lead the industrial team working on RAMSES. The cost of RAMSES will be “significantly lower” than the 300-million-euro ($380 million) cost of the Hera mission, Martino wrote in an email to Ars.
“There is still so much we have yet to learn about asteroids but, until now, we have had to travel deep into the Solar System to study them and perform experiments ourselves to interact with their surface,” said Patrick Michel, a planetary scientist at the French National Center for Scientific Research, and principal investigator on the Hera mission.
“For the first time ever, nature is bringing one to us and conducting the experiment itself,” Michel said in a press release. “All we need to do is watch as Apophis is stretched and squeezed by strong tidal forces that may trigger landslides and other disturbances and reveal new material from beneath the surface.”
Assuming it gets the final go-ahead next year, RAMSES will join NASA’s OSIRIS-APEX mission in exploring Apophis. NASA is steering the spacecraft, already in space after its use on the OSIRIS-REx asteroid sample return mission, toward a rendezvous with Apophis in 2029, but it won’t arrive at its new target until a few weeks after its close flyby of Earth. The intricacies of orbital mechanics prevent a rendezvous with Apophis any earlier.
Observations from OSIRIS-APEX, a larger spacecraft than RAMSES with a sophisticated suite of instruments, “will deliver a detailed look of what Apophis is like after the Earth encounter,” Binzel said. “But until we establish the state of Apophis before the Earth encounter, we have only one side of the picture.”
Enlarge/ At its closest approach, asteroid Apophis will closer to Earth than the ring of geostationary satellites over the equator.
Scientists are also urging NASA to consider launching a pair of mothballed science probes on a trajectory to fly by Apophis some time before its April 2029 encounter with Earth. These two spacecraft were built for NASA’s Janus mission, which the agency canceled last year after the mission fell victim to launch delays with NASA’s larger Psyche asteroid explorer. The Janus probes were supposed to launch on the same rocket as Psyche, but problems with the Psyche mission forced a delay in the launch of more than one year.
Despite the delay, Psyche could still reach its destination in the asteroid belt, but the new launch trajectory meant Janus would be unable to visit the two binary asteroids scientists originally wanted to explore with the probes. After spending nearly $50 million on the mission, NASA put the twin Janus spacecraft, each about the size of a suitcase, into long-term storage.
At the most recent workshop on Apophis missions in April, scientists heard presentations on more than 20 concepts for spacecraft and instrument measurements at Apophis.
They included an idea from Blue Origin, Jeff Bezos’s space company, to use its Blue Ring space tug as a host platform for multiple instruments and landers that could descend to the surface of Apophis, assuming research institutions have enough time and money to develop their payloads. A startup named Exploration Laboratories has proposed partnering with NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory on a small spacecraft mission to Apophis.
“At the conclusion of the workshop, it was my job to try to bring forward some consensus, because if we don’t have some consensus on our top priority, we may end up with nothing,” Binzel said. “The consensus recommendation for ESA was to more forward with RAMSES.”
Workshop participants also gently nudged NASA to use the Janus probes for a mission to Apophis. “Apophis is a mission in search of a spacecraft, and Janus is a spacecraft in search of a mission,” Binzel said. “As a matter of efficiency and basic logic, Janus to Apophis is the highest priority.”
A matter of money
But NASA’s science budget, and especially funding for its planetary science vision, is under stress. Earlier this week, NASA canceled an already-built lunar rover named VIPER after spending $450 million on the mission. The mission had exceeded its original development cost by greater than 30 percent, prompting an automatic cancellation review.
The funding level for NASA’s science mission directorate this year is nearly $500 million less than last year’s budget, and $900 million below the White House’s budget request for fiscal year 2024. Because of the tight budget, NASA officials have said, for now, they are not starting development of any new planetary science missions as they focus on finishing projects already in the pipeline, like the Europa Clipper mission, the Dragonfly quadcopter to visit Saturn’s moon Titan, and the Near-Earth Object (NEO) Surveyor telescope to search for potentially hazardous asteroids.
Enlarge/ These grainy radar views of asteroid Apophis were captured using radars at NASA’s Goldstone Deep Space Communications Complex in California and Green Bank Telescope in West Virginia.
NASA has asked the Janus team to look at the feasibility of launching on the same rocket as NEO Surveyor in 2027, according to Dan Scheeres, the Janus principal investigator at the University of Colorado. With such a launch in 2027, Janus could capture the first up-close images of Apophis before RAMSES and OSIRIS-APEX get there.
“This is something that we’re currently presenting in some discussions with NASA, just to make sure that they understand what the possibilities are there,” Scheeres said in a meeting last week of the Small Bodies Advisory Group, which represents the asteroid science community.
“These spacecraft are capable of performing future scientific flyby missions to near-Earth asteroids,” Scheeres said. “Each spacecraft has a high-quality Malin visible imager and a thermal infrared imager. Each spacecraft has the ability to track and image an asteroid system through a close, fast flyby.”
“The scientific return from an Apophis flyby by Janus could be one of the best opportunities out there,” said Daniella DellaGiustina, lead scientist on the OSIRIS-APEX mission from the University of Arizona.
Binzel, who has led the charge for Apophis missions, said there is also some symbolic value to having a spacecraft escort the asteroid by Earth. Apophis will be visible in the skies over Europe and Africa when it is closest to our planet.
“When 2 billion people are watching this, they are going to ask, ‘What are our space agencies doing?’ And if the answer is, ‘Oh, we’ll be there. We’re getting there,’ which is OSIRIS-APEX, I don’t think that’s a very satisfying answer,” Binzel said.
“As the international space community, we want to demonstrate on April 13, 2029, that we are there and we are watching, and we are watching because we want to gain the most knowledge and the most understanding about these objects that is possible, because someday it could matter,” Binzel said. “Someday, our detailed knowledge of hazardous asteroids would be among the most important knowledge bases for the future of humanity.”
Enlarge/ The core stage for NASA’s second Space Launch System rocket rolls aboard a barge that will take it from New Orleans to Kennedy Space Center in Florida.
Welcome to Edition 7.03 of the Rocket Report! One week ago, SpaceX suffered a rare failure of its workhorse Falcon 9 rocket. In fact, it was the first time the latest version of the Falcon 9, known as the Block 5, has ever failed on its prime mission after nearly 300 launches. The world’s launch pads have been silent since the grounding of the Falcon 9 fleet after last week’s failure. This isn’t surprising, but it’s noteworthy. After all, the Falcon 9 has flown more this year than all of the world’s other rockets combined and is fundamental to much of what the world does in space.
As always, we welcome reader submissions. If you don’t want to miss an issue, please subscribe using the box below (the form will not appear on AMP-enabled versions of the site). Each report will include information on small-, medium-, and heavy-lift rockets as well as a quick look ahead at the next three launches on the calendar.
Astra finally goes private, again. A long-simmering deal for Astra’s founders to take the company private has been finalized, the company announced Thursday, capping the rocket launch company’s descent from blank-check darling to delisting in three years, Bloomberg reports. The launch company’s valuation peaked at $3.9 billion in 2021, the year it went public, and was worth about $12.2 million at the end of March, according to data compiled by Bloomberg. Astra’s chief executive officer, Chris Kemp, and chief technology officer, Adam London, founded the company in 2016 with the goal of essentially commoditizing launch services for small satellites. But Astra’s rockets failed to deliver and fell short of orbit five times in seven tries.
Spiraling … Astra’s stock price tanked after the spate of launch failures, drying up its funding spigot as Kemp tried to pivot toward a slightly larger, more reliable rocket. Astra acquired a company named Apollo Fusion in 2021, entering a new business segment to produce electric thrusters for small satellites. But Astra’s launch business faltered, and last November Kemp and London submitted an offer to retake ownership of the company. Astra announced the closure of the take-private deal Thursday, with Kemp and London acquiring the company’s outstanding shares for 50 cents per share in cash, below the stock’s final listing price of 53 cents. “We will now focus all of our attention on a successful launch of Rocket 4, delivering satellite engines to our customers, and building a company of consequence,” Kemp said. (submitted by EllPeaTea and Ken the Bin)
Firefly chief leaves company. Launch startup Firefly Aerospace parted ways with CEO Bill Weber, Payload reports. The announcement of Weber’s departure late Wednesday came two days after Payload reported Firefly was investigating claims of an alleged inappropriate relationship between him and a female employee. “Firefly Aerospace’s Board of Directors announced that Bill Weber is no longer serving as CEO of the company, effective immediately,” the company said in a statement Wednesday night. Peter Schumacher takes over as interim CEO while Firefly searches for a new permanent chief executive. Schumacher was an interim CEO at Firefly before Weber’s hiring in 2022.
Two days and gone … Payload published the first report of Weber’s alleged improper relationship with a female employee Monday. Two days later, Weber was gone. Payload reported an executive brought his concerns about the alleged relationship to Firefly’s board and resigned because he lost confidence in leadership at the company. Citing four current and former employees, Payload reported Firefly’s culture became “chaotic” since Weber took the helm in 2022 after its acquisition by AE Industrial Partners. The Texas-based company achieved some success during Weber’s tenure, with four orbital launches of its Alpha rocket, although two of the flights ended up in lower-than-planned orbits. (submitted by Ken the Bin)
The easiest way to keep up with Eric Berger’s space reporting is to sign up for his newsletter, we’ll collect his stories in your inbox.
Themis hop tests delayed to next year. The initial hop tests of the European Themis reusable booster, developed by ArianeGroup and funded by ESA, won’t start until next year, European Spaceflight reports. The Swedish Space Corporation, which operates the space center in Sweden where Themis will initially fly, confirmed the schedule change. Once ArianeGroup moves on to higher altitude flights, the testing will be moved to the Guiana Space Center. ESA awarded the first development contract for the Themis booster in 2019, and the first hop tests were then scheduled for 2022. Themis’ hops will be similar to SpaceX’s Grasshopper rocket, which performed a series of up-and-down atmospheric test flights before SpaceX started recovering and reusing Falcon 9 boosters.
Fate of Themis … The Themis booster is powered by the methane-fueled Prometheus engine, also funded by ESA. A large European reusable rocket is unlikely to fly until the 2030s, but a subsidiary of ArianeGroup named MaiaSpace is developing a smaller partially reusable two-stage rocket slated to debut as soon as next year. The Maia rocket will use a modified Themis booster as its first stage. “As a result, for MaiaSpace, the continued and rapid development of the Themis program is essential to ensure it can hit its projected target of an inaugural flight of Maia in 2025,” European Spaceflight reports. (submitted by Ken the Bin)
Enlarge/ NASA completed assembling the VIPER rover last month at the Johnson Space Center in Houston.
NASA has spent $450 million designing and building a first-of-its-kind robot to drive into eternally dark craters at the Moon’s south pole, but the agency announced Wednesday it will cancel the rover due to delays and cost overruns.
“NASA intends to discontinue the VIPER mission,” said Nicky Fox, head of the agency’s science mission directorate. “Decisions like this are never easy, and we haven’t made this one, in any way, lightly. In this case, the projected remaining expenses for VIPER would have resulted in either having to cancel or disrupt many other missions in our Commercial Lunar Payload Services (CLPS) line.”
NASA has terminated science missions after development delays and cost overruns before, but it’s rare to cancel a mission with a spacecraft that is already built.
The Volatiles Investigating Polar Exploration Rover (VIPER) mission was supposed to be a robotic scout for NASA’s Artemis program, which aims to return astronauts to the lunar surface in the next few years. VIPER was originally planned to launch in late 2023 and was slated to fly to the Moon aboard a commercial lander provided by Pittsburgh-based Astrobotic, which won a contract from NASA in 2020 to deliver the VIPER rover to the lunar surface. Astrobotic is one of 14 companies in the pool of contractors for NASA’s CLPS program, with the goal of transporting government-sponsored science payloads to the Moon.
But VIPER has been delayed at least two years—the most recent schedule projected a launch in September 2025—causing its cost to grow from $433 million to more than $609 million. The ballooning costs automatically triggered a NASA review to determine whether to proceed with the mission or cancel it. Ultimately, officials said they determined NASA couldn’t pay the extra costs for VIPER without affecting other Moon missions.
“Therefore, we’ve made the decision to forego this particular mission, the VIPER mission, in order to be able to sustain the entire program,” Fox said.
“We’re disappointed,” said John Thornton, CEO of Astrobotic. “It’s certainly difficult news… VIPER has been a great team to work with, and we’re disappointed we won’t get the chance to fly them to the Moon.”
NASA said it will consider “expressions of interest” submitted by US industry and international partners by August 1 for use of the existing VIPER rover at no cost to the government. If NASA can’t find anyone to take over VIPER who can pay to get it to the Moon, the agency plans to disassemble the rover and harvest instruments and components for future lunar missions.
Scientists were dismayed by VIPER’s cancellation.
“It’s absurd, to be honest with you,” said Clive Neal, a planetary geologist at the University of Notre Dame. “It made no sense to me in terms of the economics. You’re canceling a mission that is complete, built, ready to go. It’s in the middle of testing.”
“This is a bad mistake,” wrote Phil Metzger, a planetary physicist at the University of Central Florida, in a post on X. “This was the premier mission to measure lateral and vertical variations of lunar ice in the soil. It would have been revolutionary. Other missions don’t replace what is lost here.”
Built with nowhere to go
Engineers at NASA’s Johnson Space Center in Houston finished assembling the VIPER rover last month, and managers gave approval to put the craft through environmental testing to make sure VIPER could withstand the acoustics and vibrations of launch and the extreme temperature swings it would encounter in space.
Instead, NASA has canceled the mission after spending $450 million to get it to this point. “This is a very tough decision, but it is a decision based on budgetary concerns in a very constrained budget environment,” Fox told reporters Wednesday.
VIPER is about the size of a golf cart, with four wheels, headlights, a drill, and three science instruments to search for water ice in depressions near the Moon’s south pole that have been shaded from sunlight for billions of years. This has allowed these so-called permanently shadowed regions to become cold traps, allowing water ice to accumulate at or near the surface, where it could be accessible for future astronauts to use as drinking water or an oxygen source or to convert into electricity and rocket fuel.
But first, scientists need to know exactly where the water is located and how easy it is to reach. VIPER was supposed to be the next step in mapping resources on the Moon, providing ground truth measurements to corroborate remote sensing data from satellites in lunar orbit.
But late parts deliveries delayed construction of the VIPER rover, and in 2022, NASA ordered additional testing of Astrobotic’s Griffin lunar lander to improve the chances of a successful landing with VIPER. This delayed VIPER’s launch from late 2023 until late 2024, and at the beginning of this year, more supply chain issues with the VIPER rover and the Griffin lander pushed back the launch until September 2025.
This most recent delay raised the projected cost of VIPER more than 30 percent over the original cost of the mission, prompting a NASA termination review. While the rover is now fully assembled, NASA still needed to put it through a lengthy series of tests, complete development of the ground systems to control VIPER on the Moon, and deliver the craft to Astrobotic for integration onto the Griffin lander.
The remaining work to complete VIPER and operate it for 100 days on the lunar surface would have cost around $84 million, according to Kearns.
